Murray v. State, 5487
| Citation | 249 Ark. 887,462 S.W.2d 438 |
| Decision Date | 01 February 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 5487,5487 |
| Parties | Dewey Ray MURRAY, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Arkansas |
Knox Kinney, Forrest City, for appellant.
Joe Purcell, Atty. Gen., Sam Gibson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, for appellee.
Dewey Ray Murray, appellant herein, was convicted of murder in the first degree, and his punishment fixed at death by electrocution in accordance with the jury's verdict and Ark.Stat.Ann. § 41--2227 (Repl.1964). 1 From the judgment so rendered, appellant brings this appeal. For reversal, four points are asserted, as follows:
'I. The lower court erred in its refusal to instruct the jury on second degree murder and the other degrees of homicide.
II. The lower court erred in refusing to permit Counsel for appellant to argue that appellant was not guilty of death.
III. The lower court erred in refusing to instruct the jury upon circumstantial evidence.
IV. The lower court erred in allowing the introduction of inflammatory photographs of the deceased when the cause of death was admitted.'
The evidence reflects that Murray, Danny Wayne McKay. Franklin Bosnick, and Franklin Bosnick, Jr., were involved in a robbery of Gatteys' Grocery Store on Highway 79 south of Hughes, Arkansas, when Jessie J. Morgan, a police officer, was killed. Testimony by Norris Hodge, a funeral director, was that Morgan's death was occasioned by multiple gun shot wounds--three or four .30 caliber wounds and six .22 caliber wounds.
Mrs. Joyce Gatteys, who with her husband, operates the grocery referred to, testified that in the late afternoon or early night of December 31, 1968, David (Franklin Jr.) Bosnick entered the store and fired a pistol (.22 caliber) at her husband, the bullet hitting some candy in the back of the store. 1--a Two other men, later identified as Dewey Ray Murray and Danny Wayne McKay, then came in with 'long barreled guns'. James Edwards, the 'sweep-up' boy, was told to lock the door and Bosnick instructed the Gatteys and Edwards to go to the back. Jimmy Vance, a farm worker came to the door (which was open) from the outside, but Mrs. Gatteys signaled to him and he left. 2 According to the witness, Bosnick told her to get a paper bag and put the money from the cash register in it; he also directed that she put in the change. Murray also demanded money and Mrs. Gatteys got some silver halves and old coins; appellant also took the sweep-up boy's wallet and her husband's wallet, threatening her husband, and taping his hands. About that time, there was a knock on the door and a voice clearly said 'Mrs. Gatteys, this is the law'. Bosnick declared 'Well, I'll take care of that S.B.', and directed Mrs. Gatteys to open the door. The witness stated that when she complied, Bosnick shot over her, and went out onto the porch, firing several shots with his pistol. Returning, he said 'I just killed one son-of-a-b. . . ., and I may kill another one.' Murray stated 'Well, I guess I better go out here and finish this job off out here', and went out the door, with a long barreled gun. 3 Mrs. Gatteys heard more shots fired, and the intruders ran out of the room.
James Edwards corroborated Mrs. Gatteys' testimony up to the time of the shooting. He said that when Bosnick Jr. came back in after shooting the pistol, he knelt on the floor trying to eject the spent cartridges and said, 'I just killed one man, let me see if I got enough to kill another.' Edwards said that at this time appellant commented, 'Well, I'll go out and finish this job,' and that he had a 30--30 rifle as he went out the door.
Jimmy Vance told how the store door was slammed in his face by Edwards and stated that he became suspicious and notified his boss by radio to call the law. J. W. Helms, farm manager for Shannon Brothers Enterprises, the farm on which Gatteys Grocery is located, saw officer Morgan walk around toward the residential part of the building and heard pistol shots. Then someone began firing at him. After more officers arrived, he saw Morgan lying dead, left of the steps leading to the living quarters. Trooper Bob Self testified that he and Trooper Hadaway, riding together, received the call advising that an armed robbery had taken place at Gatteys' Grocery Store. The officers started in that direction, and upon arriving, observed a 1959 Chevrolet convertible, with three white men in it. Self stated that as they pulled in front of the car, one of the subjects had a high powered rifle aimed across the back of the front seat at them (it developed that this man was Murray); they got out of the car and took four men into custody, one of the men lying on the back floor board of the convertible. W. D. Davidson of the Arkansas State Police Criminal Investigation Department arrived while Morgan's body was still in the yard. He talked with each of the suspects at that time and appellant's immediate statement was that he fired neither the pistol nor the rifle. Other supporting testimony was offered by the state, but it is not necessary to detail this evidence in determining this appeal.
Appellant, 25 years of age, testified that he was a high school graduate and had been honorably discharged from military service in January 1966; that he was employed by Park Woods Products in Pineville, Louisiana. He said that Franklin Bosnick, Sr. talked the other three into participating in the robbery. His testimony is not substantially different from that of Mrs. Gatteys until Morgan knocked on the door. Appellant stated that he first thought it might be Franklin Bosnick. He then heard a pistol firing, went outside, and David Bosnick handed the pistol to him and took the 30--30 rifle from him; Bosnick fired the 30--30 until it was empty, and gave it back. Murray stated that he did not fire the rifle at any time.
With reference to the first point for reversal, appellant contends that the trial court should have instructed the jury on second degree murder pursuant to the provisions of Ark.Stat.Ann. § 43--2152 (Repl.1964). The state, citing Ark.Stat.Ann. § 43--1024 (Repl.1964) contends that the information was amended to charge a 'felony murder' and that under Clark v. State, 169 Ark. 717, 276, S.W. 849 (1925), and other similar decisions, the court was not required to instruct on any degree except first degree murder; that appellant was guilty of that offense, or nothing.
The information filed by the prosecuting attorney, after setting forth where and when the offense was committed, accused Murray and the others of the crime of murder in the first degree in that they 'unlawfully, wilfully, and feloniously after premeditation and deliberation and of their malice aforethought did assault, kill, and murder Jessie J. Morgan by shooting him with a firearm or firearms'.
In instructing the jury, the court read the information and then added '' The record, ( the original transcript) clearly reflects that this was done in chambers before the jury was ever selected for the trial of the case. The attorney for appellant stated to the court that he desired to object . The prosecuting attorney stated 'I think the fact, if the proof shows, the law says what murder in the first degree shall constitute, but if he's raising that, I would like to amend by 'comma perpetrated in a robbery". Whereupon the court said 'The Court will permit the amendment to the Information to charge this defendant with committing the crime of murder while perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate the crime of robbery'. Objections and exceptions were taken to the court's order.
Ark.Stat.Ann. § 43--1024, being Initiated Measure 1936, No. 3, § 24, provides as follows:
What is 'the record'? In Silas v. State, 232 Ark. 248, 337 S.W.2d 644, quoting an earlier case, 4 we said:
'The record proper includes the Pleadings, any Exhibits thereto, Statement Showing Service of Summons, any material Order of Court preceding judgment, the Judgment itself, Motion for New Trial, the Order Overruling same, and the Grant of Appeal.'
It was not necessary that the Information itself be amended, but only necessary that an order of the court be made and it is sufficient if the court simply dictates the order to the court reporter. In Lane, Smith & Barg v. State, 217 Ark. 114, 229 S.W.2d 43, a situation arose that we consider analogous. The opinion reflects the following:
'Appellants say that their motion to quash the indictments should have been sustained because the Court's minutes or records did not affirmatively show that the indictments were returned in open Court in the presence of the Grand Jury, nor was it shown that twelve of the jurors voted to indict; and, secondly, there was no legal evidence presented to the Grand Jury upon which it could base true bills.
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nevels v. State
...; People v. Bennett , 183 Colo. 125, 515 P.2d 466, 469 n.1 (1973) ; Henry v. State , 298 A.2d 327 (Del. 1972) ; Murray v. State , 249 Ark. 887, 462 S.W.2d 438, 442-43 (1971) ; State v. Harvill , 106 Ariz. 386, 476 P.2d 841, 844 (1970) ; Allen v. State , 420 P.2d 465 (Alaska 1966) ; Holland ......
-
State v. Adcock
...Holland rationale. Allen v. State, 420 P.2d 465 (Alaska 1966); State v. Harvill, 106 Ariz. 386, 476 P.2d 841 (1970); Murray v. State, 249 Ark. 887, 462 S.W.2d 438 (1971); People v. Bennett, 183 Colo. 125, 515 P.2d 466 (1973); Henry v. State, 298 A.2d 327 (Del.Supr.1972); State v. Wilkins, 2......
-
Hankins v. State
...Alaska, Allen v. State, 420 P.2d 465 (1966); Arizona, State v. Harvill, 106 Ariz. 386, 476 P.2d 841 (1970); Arkansas, Murray v. State, 249 Ark. 887, 462 S.W.2d 438 (1971); (But see concurring opinion in Simmons v. State, 255 Ark. 82, 498 S.W.2d 870); Colorado, People v. Bennett, 183 Colo. 1......
-
Nevels v. State
...P.2d 728 (Kan. 1974); People v. Bennett, 515 P.2d 466, 469 n.1 (Colo. 1973); Henry v. State, 298 A.2d 327 (Del. 1972); Murray v. State, 462 S.W.2d 438, 442-43 (Ark. 1971)); State v. Harvill, 476 P.2d 841, 844 (Ariz. 1970); Allen v. State, 420 P.2d 465 (Alaska 1966); Holland v. Commonwealth,......